3 sks- Suggs goes complete HAM on them and puts himself in the CPOTY race.

15%

[ 3 ]

Total Votes : 20

Author

Message

FlaccomaniaJoined: 12 Aug 2008Posts: 32874Location: Hashtag BirdCity

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:49 pm Post subject:

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:

DontTazeMeBro wrote:

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games._________________

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

PS I love you!

I swear your optimism always makes me feel so much better about this team.

Honestly us lighting up the playoffs wouldn't surprise me much. As it stands we'll have the #2 seed in the AFC and we'll be playing at home. Which means our OL will be playing much better and Flacco will have time to dice teams up. It also means our receivers will magically start getting separation.

What I'm worried most about come playoff time is if our offense can outscore Denver. If we can get the first round bye, play the Patriots at home, with Denver playing the Texans... I think that's our best chance. I like our chances at being able to beat the Patriots defense and contain the Patriots offense. I also like the Broncos chances at beating the Texans on the road better than the Patriots beating them. I'm worried about the Broncos, but nothing worries me more than facing the Texans- on the road... or just playing on the road in general, but as it stands they're the only team we'd have to play on the road.

That said, the Texans have had some games where they've come out not fully ready to play. Since they've already proven they can embarrass us- it's not inconceivable that they could come out and have a slight let down against a team that maybe they feel like they've "gotten over the hump against". I could see it being a case of over-confidence breeding carelessness._________________

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games.

Over his career? False. Lately? True (I think). I'd have to go back and look at the stats, but the only games I remember are Pitt and New England, so I give him the benefit of the doubt there. But for the first 3 years of his career he was almost anti-clutch, basically all the way up until the Pitt game last year.

Honestly I don't know what the answer to that question is. Obviously it's probably true given the nature of you asking it and wanting to refute my claim, but again, I don't know the stats behind it._________________#FireDeanPees...and Chris Hewitt....and Matt Weiss

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games.

Over his career? False. Lately? True (I think). I'd have to go back and look at the stats, but the only games I remember are Pitt and New England, so I give him the benefit of the doubt there. But for the first 3 years of his career he was almost anti-clutch, basically all the way up until the Pitt game last year.

Honestly I don't know what the answer to that question is. Obviously it's probably true given the nature of you asking it and wanting to refute my claim, but again, I don't know the stats behind it.

He has been clutch, now we might not have always won the game but alot more of those losses ended with dropped passes that would have been first downs than turnovers

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games.

Over his career? False. Lately? True (I think). I'd have to go back and look at the stats, but the only games I remember are Pitt and New England, so I give him the benefit of the doubt there. But for the first 3 years of his career he was almost anti-clutch, basically all the way up until the Pitt game last year.

Honestly I don't know what the answer to that question is. Obviously it's probably true given the nature of you asking it and wanting to refute my claim, but again, I don't know the stats behind it.

Anti-clutch his first 3 years? Do you mean aside from the 8 game winning drives he had in those years? Which also excludes a huge comeback in Minnesota the Hauschka blew the kick on? Which also excludes the drops in the playoffs against PIT when Joe delivered at the end of the game, yet the team couldn't come through?

Point is, Joe absolutely pulled through more times than not in the clutch, even in his first 3 years. There is only a handful of times he made a mistake at the end of a game that ended it for us, but most times he's most certainly gotten it done.

And yes, our defense (and offense itself) have shown over the last few years to give up the leads we build, particularly in 2010 (8 blown leads with < 5 mins to go in the games, Joe was able to win 4 of them for us).

You're absolutely right that these were loaded questions The point is, it's not about "flipping a switch", it's that history has shown that when he's needed, Joe typically pulls through for us. Whether it's a very pretty pulling through, or doing JUST enough to win, he's done it. So, come Jan/Feb, there's no reason to doubt that Joe can continue to do so -- as much as people want to criticize the guy for not having "it", he's certainly come through most times when he's needed to, he's just not jumping all over the field while doing it._________________

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games.

Over his career? False. Lately? True (I think). I'd have to go back and look at the stats, but the only games I remember are Pitt and New England, so I give him the benefit of the doubt there. But for the first 3 years of his career he was almost anti-clutch, basically all the way up until the Pitt game last year.

Honestly I don't know what the answer to that question is. Obviously it's probably true given the nature of you asking it and wanting to refute my claim, but again, I don't know the stats behind it.

Anti-clutch his first 3 years? Do you mean aside from the 8 game winning drives he had in those years? Which also excludes a huge comeback in Minnesota the Hauschka blew the kick on? Which also excludes the drops in the playoffs against PIT when Joe delivered at the end of the game, yet the team couldn't come through?

Point is, Joe absolutely pulled through more times than not in the clutch, even in his first 3 years. There is only a handful of times he made a mistake at the end of a game that ended it for us, but most times he's most certainly gotten it done.

And yes, our defense (and offense itself) have shown over the last few years to give up the leads we build, particularly in 2010 (8 blown leads with < 5 mins to go in the games, Joe was able to win 4 of them for us).

You're absolutely right that these were loaded questions The point is, it's not about "flipping a switch", it's that history has shown that when he's needed, Joe typically pulls through for us. Whether it's a very pretty pulling through, or doing JUST enough to win, he's done it. So, come Jan/Feb, there's no reason to doubt that Joe can continue to do so -- as much as people want to criticize the guy for not having "it", he's certainly come through most times when he's needed to, he's just not jumping all over the field while doing it.

And most of those blown leads were due to Flacco sucking and then redeeming himself.

I hope, for the sake of this team that you're right and Flacco can manage to "just get by" until he needs to pull a rabbit out of a hat at the end of a game in January and hopefully February._________________#FireDeanPees...and Chris Hewitt....and Matt Weiss

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

So then in January we're just supposed to "flip the switch" and remember how to win games with our offense?

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe that approach will work.

True or False: Joe Flacco has typically delivered come crunch time.

True or False: Our team tends to blow leads and then pull it out at the end of games.

Over his career? False. Lately? True (I think). I'd have to go back and look at the stats, but the only games I remember are Pitt and New England, so I give him the benefit of the doubt there. But for the first 3 years of his career he was almost anti-clutch, basically all the way up until the Pitt game last year.

Honestly I don't know what the answer to that question is. Obviously it's probably true given the nature of you asking it and wanting to refute my claim, but again, I don't know the stats behind it.

Anti-clutch his first 3 years? Do you mean aside from the 8 game winning drives he had in those years? Which also excludes a huge comeback in Minnesota the Hauschka blew the kick on? Which also excludes the drops in the playoffs against PIT when Joe delivered at the end of the game, yet the team couldn't come through?

Point is, Joe absolutely pulled through more times than not in the clutch, even in his first 3 years. There is only a handful of times he made a mistake at the end of a game that ended it for us, but most times he's most certainly gotten it done.

And yes, our defense (and offense itself) have shown over the last few years to give up the leads we build, particularly in 2010 (8 blown leads with < 5 mins to go in the games, Joe was able to win 4 of them for us).

You're absolutely right that these were loaded questions The point is, it's not about "flipping a switch", it's that history has shown that when he's needed, Joe typically pulls through for us. Whether it's a very pretty pulling through, or doing JUST enough to win, he's done it. So, come Jan/Feb, there's no reason to doubt that Joe can continue to do so -- as much as people want to criticize the guy for not having "it", he's certainly come through most times when he's needed to, he's just not jumping all over the field while doing it.

And most of those blown leads were due to Flacco sucking and then redeeming himself.

I hope, for the sake of this team that you're right and Flacco can manage to "just get by" until he needs to pull a rabbit out of a hat at the end of a game in January and hopefully February.

Let me ask you a question. I'm being 100% serious.

I know that you have stated this is the worst 8-2 team that you have ever seen. That being said, they are clearly above average as they have been able to go 8-2. That doesn't happen by luck. Even teams that aren't that great of a 10-6 or 11-5 aren't BAD teams ever, just maybe not AS good as their record would indicate.

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team._________________

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

PS I love you!

I swear your optimism always makes me feel so much better about this team.

Would you believe I used to be really negative about the Ravens. I think I probably only picked us to win 1 road game in 2006.

If Willis McGahee doesn't come back and they don't replace that production with Hillman, I'm not worried too much about Denver._________________

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team.

You just reminded me of when I used to have to defend Orlando's legitimacy.

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team.

You just reminded me of when I used to have to defend Orlando's legitimacy.

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team.

The generalities of this team aren't good (offense IN GENERAL, defense IN GENERAL, etc.) to a point.

In my opinion, our red zone defense is the best in the league. Our ability to get off the field on 3rd down and get key sacks and turnovers is good (none of this relates to how I feel overall about our defense. I've said multiple times our defense is just painful to watch, then out of nowhere they make ONE good play to save their butts).

On offense our ability to close games this year has been good. Bernard Pierce has been good.

Our Special Teams have greatly improved since last year. Coverage wise we are VERY good this year, and obviously return wise we are very good.

There are many areas within the general saying of "our offense is good" that have been good this year (3rd down defense, red zone defense, special teams in general), but when it comes down to it, our offense hasn't been good in general and neither has our defense, well actually our defense is starting to turn the season around and I guess within Dean Pees' scheme our defense has been about as good as you can want it, so there's that.

I guess if you're satisfied with our offense being a Jekyll and Hyde type of offense for the entire season, then our offense has been good. I look for consistency and that's the last thing our offense has been; consistent. We score 55 points one week then the next can't even manage to move the ball to get into FG range one time._________________#FireDeanPees...and Chris Hewitt....and Matt Weiss

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team.

You just reminded me of when I used to have to defend Orlando's legitimacy.

I was fine with Flacco. I had zero doubt if we needed him to get us a TD at the end Sunday he would have. When we got down to four minutes and we needed to burn some time what did we do? We took 2 minutes off the clock and made them burn all their timeouts. I don't think we are going to do anything more than we need to until January.

PS I love you!

I swear your optimism always makes me feel so much better about this team.

Would you believe I used to be really negative about the Ravens. I think I probably only picked us to win 1 road game in 2006.

If Willis McGahee doesn't come back and they don't replace that production with Hillman, I'm not worried too much about Denver.

Lance Ball should be a solid guy for them. Don't forget that McGahee fumbled a lot this year which probably kept Denver off the board more than they should have been, so as long as their RB can find holes and not fumble and pick up those 4-6 yards per carry, they're going to be SCARY._________________#FireDeanPees...and Chris Hewitt....and Matt Weiss

Anyway, what on this team IS good in your opinion? What has taken us to an 8-2 record? If I understand correctly, Joe Flacco isn't good, our defense is awful (i believe you have called it bottom 5), and our coaches all suck. So, how are we 8-2? Something must be going right on this team.

The generalities of this team aren't good (offense IN GENERAL, defense IN GENERAL, etc.) to a point.

In my opinion, our red zone defense is the best in the league. Our ability to get off the field on 3rd down and get key sacks and turnovers is good (none of this relates to how I feel overall about our defense. I've said multiple times our defense is just painful to watch, then out of nowhere they make ONE good play to save their butts).

On offense our ability to close games this year has been good. Bernard Pierce has been good.

Our Special Teams have greatly improved since last year. Coverage wise we are VERY good this year, and obviously return wise we are very good.

There are many areas within the general saying of "our offense is good" that have been good this year (3rd down defense, red zone defense, special teams in general), but when it comes down to it, our offense hasn't been good in general and neither has our defense, well actually our defense is starting to turn the season around and I guess within Dean Pees' scheme our defense has been about as good as you can want it, so there's that.

I guess if you're satisfied with our offense being a Jekyll and Hyde type of offense for the entire season, then our offense has been good. I look for consistency and that's the last thing our offense has been; consistent. We score 55 points one week then the next can't even manage to move the ball to get into FG range one time.

I'm only pointing this out because quite frankly... it's egregiously wrong- like to the point that if Stephen A. Smith were reading this, he'd yell at you really loud using big words and stuff...

I mean really doe.. our 3rd down defense has in fact been the biggest weakness of this defense all year long. Just because we were able to play good 3rd down defense in one game does not legitimate it make us. Have you ever wondered why our run defense has been relatively solid looking on a YPC basis, yet we give up so many yards? Have you ever wondered why we're a bottom 10 team in defensive TOP (low to high). Quite frankly, it's because of the fact that our 3rd down defense has been horrid. The only thing that has helped us out statistically is having played Brandon Weeden, the Raiders, and an injured backup QB for the past 3 weeks.

Our run defense is inconsistent from play to play, but generally it tends to even itself out and looks to have nice looking numbers to it. The only thing that is worse than our 3rd down defense has been our passing average allowed, but this goes back to Dean Pees defense... that gives huge cushions to WRs to prevent the big play, but gets annihilated underneath for big gains. So this, at least, is by design. What shouldn't be by design is how bad we are at getting off the field.

Now in terms of your post in "general"
I think what you're saying is exactly true. But the thing is you're saying the same exact thing DTMB is saying, only he's more correct. Sure our offense and defense has failed to be a splash "in general" but we've won games in every way you can win them this year. We've won with explosive offense, we've won with our return game on special teams, we've won games with our kicking game, we've won games with our defense. Sure all of the units haven't looked dominant in every game and outside of the Raiders game they haven't all shown up together, but his point stands that this team has proven to be a survivor. We may or may not make it to a Championship, but as it stands this team continues to survive games... by any means necessary. Sure there is no one part that we can pimp up in NFL gen or to local fans at a bar, sure this team doesn't look shiny and cool, and sure this team plays down to the level of their competition ALL THE TIME... but in the end, it hasn't really mattered because we found a way to get it done.

There is a Harbaugh togetherness and family speech in there somewhere... and he's not far off. Sure Harbaugh's speeches are insanely corny, but this team this season probably has more of Harbaugh in it, than any team we've had. We're that corny, uncool underdog that somehow has overachieved and continues to overachieve... by some unexplainable measure. The only thing we can be sure that this team has, is heart. Even when we were down by 30 against Houston our guys were hustling and going out trying to make plays. What we have is grit- we have the intangibles that you can't see and point to. We have WRs playing the day their younger brother has died- only to make key plays for the win. We have young players and free agents stepping up to make big plays when the guy in front of them has gone down with a season ending injury. We have an All-Star pass rusher whose going to get paid either way, yet doesn't rest on his laurels but instead kicks it into high gear to get back to lead this team with his play and intensity. We have a team that has faced adversity and still hasn't given up. We're not a group of world beaters, but like I said a few weeks ago, if this team gets to the playoffs and are only winning by one point until they're hoisting the Lombardi trophy, then mission accomplished. Style points sell jerseys, not win you games._________________